The Places of Worship Act 1991 was devised and enacted by the Indian government, led by P. V. Narasimha Rao, to address religious tensions as they manifested. The Act was highly relevant considering the Ram Janmabhoomi movement and the controversies over the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, leading to its demolition in 1992. These legislations were made to cease further conflicts over religious site issues in India. However, the law has recently found itself under the scanner, especially with new disputes over places like Mathura and the Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi Mosque.
The Need for the Places of Worship Act
The Places of Worship Act was enacted in 1991 when religious and political tensions rose. The Babri Masjid in Ayodhya had become a point of debate for religious discussions as various groups were trying to stake claims over specific places of worship. The Ram Janmabhoomi movement, which sought the construction of a Hindu temple at the site, was gaining momentum.
The government brought in this Act to address the rising controversies over religious conversions of places of worship. Introduced by the then Home Minister, S. B. Chavan, in Parliament, he explained that it was an essential piece of legislation to keep the communal harmony of the nation intact. The idea was to stop the religious fights, which most of the time erupted because of the intention to convert religious places, therefore stopping the increase of violence and tensions.
Understanding the Places of Worship Act
Provisions of the Places of Worship Act, 1991
The Act was passed to preserve the identity and religious character of places of worship, as it existed on August 15, 1947. According to the Act,
- Section 3 prohibits any place of worship, wholly or in part, from being converted to a place of worship of any other religious denomination or even a different sect of the same religion.
- Section 4(1) declares that the religious character of any place of worship shall remain the same as it existed on August 15, 1947, both in terms of the building and its religious significance.
- Section 4(2) states that all proceedings relating to the change of religious character of a place of worship that existed on August 15, 1947, shall abate, and no new suits can be instituted. It is designed to prevent litigations relating to the conversion of religious places from going on indefinitely.
- Section 5 states certain exclusions to the Act. It states that the Act shall not apply to the case of Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid and bars any suit or proceeding falling under it. Further, this Act shall not apply to any place declared a historical monument or an archaeological site under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
- Section 6 concerns the punishment upon offenders, which is imprisonment for three years or the amount of fine provided.
Analysis by Supreme Court on the Places of Worship Act
Of course, the Supreme Court itself had spoken on the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act earlier in the context of Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid. Even the 2019 Ayodhya judgment that sanctioned the building of a temple to the Lord Hindu at the disputed spot refers to the Places of Worship Act.
Even though the Court has not considered reviewing the constitutional validity of the Act, it has defended principles such as upholding the secular character of the state and ensuring that the religious nature of places of worship remains the same as it was on August 15, 1947. The Court said that the importance of secularism as enshrined in the Constitution was the reason behind the Act becoming a manifestation of that value.
Although the Court’s 2019 judgment does not relate to any direct aspect of the Act’s applicability, a broader interpretation of this decision implies that the Places of Worship Act follows the constitutional promises of secularism and harmony within the respective communities. It has been a vital form of legislation through which India ensures that secularism is practised at social levels and in its geographical existence, prohibiting retrogressive change into places of worship.
Opposition to the Places of Worship Act
Although the Act was enacted for religious harmony, it has received considerable criticism.
The major criticism is that the Act violates the right to judicial review, which is considered one of the Constitution’s basic features. The critics argue that the Act curtails the power of courts to examine and adjudicate disputes regarding places of worship, particularly where issues of religious freedom and property rights are involved. It has raised a serious concern that the Act may infringe upon fundamental rights.
Another criticism of the Act is that it restricts the rights of certain religious communities, including Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs. Some critics say that the Act denies them the right to seek justice against the destruction of their religious places by invaders in the past since it freezes the status of places of worship as they existed in 1947.
There are also apprehensions regarding the central government’s authority to enact legislation on this issue. Some critics argue that pilgrimage sites and burial grounds are subjects under the State List of the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution. Hence, some people feel that the Centre did not have constitutional authority to enact the Act. However, the government argues its authority under Entry 97 of the Union List, which grants it the power to make legislation on matters not covered by the states.
Legal Issues and Future Directions
Several legal issues and debates are related to the Places of Worship Act, including constitutionality and scope. Some of the key topics include:
- Constitutionality: Does the Act violate Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution that guarantee all citizens equal rights?
- Secularism: Does the Act infringe Articles 25, 26, and 29 that ensure the freedom of religion and breach the fundamental postulate of secularism under the Constitution?
- Historical Sites: Have places of worship conquered, destroyed, and transformed as places of worship gained religious sanctity under the personal laws of Hindus and Muslims?
These are precisely the questions and concerns regarding the Places of Worship Act. Therefore, the legislature and the judiciary need to address them to bring the Act in tune with the principles of the Constitution and the necessities for communal harmony.
Conclusion
Such crucial pieces of legislation are the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which is very important to maintain and preserve the religious character of a place of worship as it was established before August 15, 1947. It aims at preserving communal harmony with secularism, but the judicial review suffers curtailment and might further hamper some religious communities with certain rights. Debates of law and politics have constantly evolved, especially about the disputes that are still being continued relating to the Mathura and Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi Mosque. Therefore, the Act’s future will be viewed in terms of how the judiciary and the legislature deal with the complexities of religious freedom, secularism, and constitutional rights.
